IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-S) 


£/      /^^^^. 


|l|  LO 

llil 

I.I 


1.25 


IM   125 


•-  M   1112.2 

"  lis  lilllio 


1.4 


1.6 


i  ill^'MJ^ULiJljlivj 

Scierces 
Corpomtion 


4lN^ 


^\^ 


<\^ 


««>< 


33  WIST  MAIN  STRICT 

WL'^STKR, NY.  MSSO 

(716)  •7a-4S03 


i'  '  . 


mj" 


4ip      ^^j3 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICIVIH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  Insttitut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiquas 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  wiiich  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reprodiuction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couieur 


I      I    Covers  damaged/ 


Couverture  endommagde 

Covers  restored  and/or  lai 
Couverture  restaurie  et/ou  pellicul^e 

Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 

Coloured  maps/ 

Cartes  giographiques  en  couieur 

Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue 

Encre  de  couieur  {i.e.  autre  que  bleue  oj  noire) 

Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planciies  et/ou  illustrations  en  couieur 

d  with  other  material/ 
avec  d'autres  documents 


I      I  Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 

I      I  Cover  title  missing/ 

I      I  Coloured  maps/ 

I      I  Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 

I      I  Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 

□  Bound  with  other  material/ 
Reli« 


D 


D 


n 


Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  re  liure  serr^e  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distorsion  le  long  dr  la  marge  inlirieure 

Blank  leaves  addc«d  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  x^xt.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  qua  certaines  pages  blanches  ajoutios 
lors  dune  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texta, 
mait),  lorsque  cela  «tait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  Hi  filmies. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppl^mentaires; 


L'Institut  a  microfilm*  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  *t6  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  d^t.-^ils 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peutdtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibiiographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
una  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  mithode  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiquis  ci-dessous. 


n 


v/ 


n 


y 


D 
D 
D 
D 


Coloured  pages/ 
Pages  de  couieur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommag^es 

Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaur^es  et/ou  pellicul^es 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
Pages  d^colories,  tachet^es  ou  piqudes 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  d^tachdes 

Showthrough/ 
Transparence 

Quality  of  print  varies/ 
Quality  inigale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  material/ 
Comprend  du  materiel  suppl^mentair* 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 

Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc..  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensura  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiallement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata.  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  At*  film*es  A  nouveau  de  faqon  it 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


This  item  id  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 
Ce  document  est  film*  au  taux  de  r*duction  indiqu*  ci-dessous. 
^OX  14X  18X  22X 


26X 


12X 


30X 


16X 


20X 


MX 


28X 


J 


32X 


ire 

3S  du 
modifier 
er  una 
filmage 


es 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

Douglas  Library 
Queen's  University 

The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  -^  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED "),  or  the  symbol  7  (meaning  "END  "). 
whichever  applies. 

IVIaps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method. 


L'exemplaire  fiim6  f<jt  reproduit  grflce  d  la 
g6n6rosit6  de: 

Douglas  Library 
Queen's  University 

Les  images  suivantes  ont  6t6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  nettetr  de  l'exemplaire  film«,  et  en 
conformity    vec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 

Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprim^e  sont  filmte  en  commenpant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernlAre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration.  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  salon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  film6s  en  commenpant  par  la 
premiere  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaitra  sur  la 
derniAre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbols  — »►  signifie  "A  SUIVRE",  le 
symbols  V  signifie  "FIN". 

Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
film6s  A  des  taux  de  reduction  diffirents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clich6,  il  est  film6  A  partir 
de  I'angle  sup6rieur  gauche,  de  gauche  A  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  ntcessaire.  Les  diagranmes  suivants 
illustrent  la  m6thode. 


srrata 
to 


pelure, 
tn  A 


32X 


1 

2 

3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

8 

6 

IF? 


"hVi': 


A"  iJ  '"« 


^  !««■ 

lli^^^-^_ 


M 


I- 

•J" 
I*' 


■mmg^ 


RECIPROCITY   TREATY. 


k 


SPEECH 


OF 


HON.    CHARLES  SUMNER, 

ON    THE   RESOLUTION  FOR    THE     TERMINATION    CF    THE    RECIPROCITY 
TREATY  BETWEEN  THE  UNITED  STATES  AND  GREAT  BRITAIN,- 

IN  THE  SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  DEC.  21st,  1864,  AND  JAN.  12th  &  13th,  1865. 


,#■. 


NEW  YORK  YOUNG  MEN'S  REPUBLICAN  UNION: 

18€5. 


tiM^^ 


\<^  I 


,p* 


V. ..  .A  C 


& 


fD>'^ 


C-..Qvr_, 


U> 


The  EDITH  and  LORNE  PIERCE 
COLLECTION  of  CANADI  ANA 


ilueen's  Utiiversity  at  Kingston 


NEW  YORK  YOUNG  MEN'S  REPUBLICAN  UNION 

« 

1856-1860-1864. 


OFFICERS. 

MAKK  HOYT,  President. 
DEXTER  A.  HAWKINS,  Vice-President 
FRANK  "W.  BALLARD,  Corresponding  Secretary. 
CHARLES  T.  RODGERS,  Treasurer. 


BOARD    OF    CONTROL. 


CEPHAS  BRAINERD,  Chairman. 
MARK  HOYT. 
DEXTER  A.  HAWKLNfS. 
FRANK  W  BALLARD. 
CHARLES  T.  RODGERS. 


BENJAMIN  F.  MANIERRE. 
THOMAS  L.  THORNELL. 
WILLIAM  M.  FRANKLIN. 
CHARLES  C.  NOTT. 
GEORGE  H.  MATHEWS. 


RECIPROCITY    TREATY. 


SPEECH 


OF 


HON.   CHARLES   SUMNER, 

OF-    MASSACHUSETTS, 

ON  THE  RESOLUTION  FOR  THE  TERMINATION  OF  THE  RECIPROCITY  TREATY 
BETWEEN  THE  UNITED  STATES  AND  GREAT  BRITAIN; 

In  the  Setiate  of  the  United  Staten,  J)eeemh<^  »lat,  1804,  and  January  12th  and  13th,  1808. 


The  following  Resolution  passed  the 
House  of  Represeutativ33  Dec.  13th,  1864: 

Joint  Resolution  authorizing  the  Pres- 
ident of  the  United  States  to  give  to  the  gov- 
ernment of  Great  Britain  the  notice  re- 
quired for  the  termination  of  the  Reciprodtg 
Treaty  of  the  fifth  of  June,  1854. 

Whereas,  Under  the  treaty  made  by  the 
United  States  with  Great  Britain,  procIainati»(U 
of  which  was  made  by  the  President  of  the 
United  States  on  the  IHh  of  September,  1854, 
for  the  purpose  of  extending  reciprocal  trade 
i>etween  the  British  Nortli  American  Colonies 
and  the  United  States,  nearly  all  the  articles 
which  Canada  has  to  sell  are  admitted  into  the 
United  States  tree  of  duty,  while  heavy  duties  i 
are  now  imposed  upon  many  of  those  articles 
which  the  people  of  the  United  States  have  to 
sell,  with  the  intention  of  excluding  them  from 
the  Canadian  markets ;  and  whereas  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  United  States,  in  the  first  session  of 
the  Thirty-sixth  Cong'-ces,  caused  to  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  House  of  Representatives  an 
oftitiial  report  setting  forth  the  ineqaiity  and  ii'- 
justice  exii'-ting  in  our  present  intercourse  with 
Canada,  si  bversivo  of  the  true  intent  of  the 
treaty,  owing  to  the  subsequent  legislation  of 
(Canada;  and  whereas,  by  the  fifth  article  of  the 
treaty  pro\  ision  was  made  that  it  should  remain 
in  force  for  ten  yettrs  from  the  date  iii  which  it 


,  should  go  into  operation,  and  further  until  the 
I  expiration  of  twelve  months  after  either  of  the 
!  high  contracting  parties  should  give  notice  to  the 
other  of  its  wish  to  terminate  the  same,  each  of 
j  the  high  contracting  parties  being  at  liberty  to 
I  give  such  notice  to  the  other  at  the  end  of  the 
said  term  of  ten  years,  or  at  any  time  after- 
wards :  and  whereas  by  a  further  proclamation, 
issued  by  the  President  of  the  United  States, 
bearing  date  the  sixteenth  day  of  March,  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  fifty-five,  it  was  de- 
clared that  the  said  treaty  should  go  into  effect 
and  be  obsei-ved  on  the  part  of  the  United 
States;  and  whereas  it  is  desirable  that  friendly 
relations  should  bo  continued  between  the  Uni- 
ted States  and  the  British    North  American 
provinces,  and    that    commercial    intercourse 
should  bo  hereafter  carried  on  between  tham 
upon  principles  rewprocnlly  beneficial  and  satis- 
factory to  both  parties :    Therefore 

Resolved,  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives of  the  United  States  of  America,  in 
Congress  assembled.  That  the  President  of  the 
United  States  be,  and  ho  is  herobv,  authorized 
and  requested  to  give  to  the  government  of  the 
United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland 
the  notice  required  by  the  fifth  article  of  the 
said  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  the  5th of  June,  1854, 
for  the  termination  of  the  same. 

Deo.  20 — Mr.  Sumner,  u-om  the  Com. 


EECIPROCITY  TREATY. 


mitteo  on  Foreigu  Relations,  in  the  Senate,  j  more  advantageous  to  Canada  than  to  th« 
reported  tha  following  substitute :  |  United  States ;  that  in  short,  it  was  unilateral . 

Joint  RF.sohV'noJi  providing  for  the  ter-  \  T^"^  feeling  has  of  late  ripened  into  soine- 
mination  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  fifth  of ^^^^'^'^^  ^ike  conviction.  At  the  same  time 
June,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-four,  he-  j  ^^^'  exigencies  of  the  present  war  requiring 
twcen  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain,    ^o  large  an  expenditure,  make  it  unreason- 

IVhereas,  It  ia  provided  in  the  Keciprocity  I  ^'^^  ^'^^  "'  ^^^  ^''^^^"'""^  ^  treaty  by  which 
Treaty  concluded  at  Washington,  the  5th  ofi*^^.''''^^"'^^^  ^'ft''«  country  unriuestionably 
June,  18.54,  between  the  United  States  of  the  j  s^^^"^-^-  Tt  is  such  considerations  as  these 
one  part,  and  the  the  United  Kingdom  of  Cicat  |  which  have  brought  the  public  mind  to  itJ« 
Britain  and  Ireland  of  tho  other  part,  that  this  J  present  position  The  unauiiabie  feelings 
treaty  "  shall  remain  in  force  for  ten  years  from  I  manifested  toward  us  by  the  people  of 
the  date  at  which  it  may  come  into  operation,  Canada  have  had  little  inlluence  on  the 
and  further  until  the  expiration  of  twelve ,  question,  unless,  perhaps,  they  may  hav<^ 
months  after  either  of  the  high  contracting  par- ;  ^^^.j^ed  to  compel  us  to  look  at  it  in  tbe 
ties  shall  give  notice  ..  the  other  of  lis  wish  to  ^  ,^,  ,,f  ^,,^^,,,„  ^^^^^,,^.  ^j^^,,^  ^,f  sentiment. 
T«rmmate  the  same ;"  and  whereas  it  appears,       n^^  .•         i-    ,      n  ,      .       .     .     ,    ,    , 

by  a  proclamation  of  tho  President  of  the  i .  1>5"4'H'stiou  of  the  fisheries  is  included 
United  States,  bearing  date  Kith  March.  185,5, ' '"  ^^^^'^  ^^""^''^^J'-  ^'"*  ^*  '^  ""*  ^""^ted  tluit 
that  the  treaty  came  into  operation  on  that !  ^*-f'^i'«  the  termination  of  t!io  treaty  sonu* 
day;  and  whereas,  further,  it  is  no  longer  fur i  arrangeinoiit,  either  by  reciprocal  legishi- 
the  interests  of  the  United  States  to  continue  ,  tiou  or  by  further  negotiation,  can  be  mad(» 
tho  same  in  force:  Therefore  on  this  matter  so  far  as  it  may  be  needed. 


Resolved,  hy  the  Senate  and  House  of  Krpre- 


The  coiauiitte,  after  careful  consideratifdi 


sentatives  of  the  United  States  of  America,  in  !  '^^  '''  ^^'^^  ni(H;ting,  was  unanimous  in  its  re- 
Congress  assembled,  That  notice  be  given  of  the  1  port.  And  as  the  committee  represents  all 
t*rm  ination  of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  accord-  j  parts  of  the  country  and  all  sentiments  of 
ing  to  the  provision  therein  contained  for  the  i  the  Senate,  1  have  tliought  that  perhaps 
termination  of  the  same;  and  the  President  of^  there  miglit  be  a  similar  unanimitv  among 
the  United  States  is  hereby  charged  with  the  |  Senators.  Therefore  I  forbear  all  further 
communication  of  such  notice  to  tho  govern- 1  „„.,,„„i-„    ,,  i      i   x-  x 

4.    V  i.1,    TT  -i.  J  Tr-     1         ,.  ,-.      .  ,.  .,       i  remarks,  and  ask  lor  a  vote, 
ment  ot  the  United  IvingJom  of  Great  Britain  I      ,>      .,  ^.         ^.  ,,     tt  i     x,      /•    .i 

and  Ireland.  I  ^  ^^  motion  ut  Mr.  Hale  the  furtlier 

■r,  .,1       iir      CI  II    ,  ,  c.<iUfiidenition  of  the  question  was  postTioned, 

Dec.  '.31. — Mr.    Sumneu   called   up   the  ,,     ,,      ,.,,,      ,.  ^  ,.-.-   •. 

„•• ;     4  rn  1    i-i  X    1    1       ,  •  ''"  *'''■  I'-^h  of  Jiuiuarv,  18().),  it  M'as   re- 

sbject.  Die    substitute    r«;ported   by   him 


was  adopted  by  way  of  amendment.     On 
tho   passage   of  tlie   Joint   Resoluthju,   as ! 
amended,  he  spoke  brietiy  as  fidlows: 

Mr.  President :  I  had  originally  intended, 
on  the  consideration  of  this  proposition,  to 
review  the  whole  subject,  and  to  exhibit  at 
length  the  history  of  the  reciprocity  tr  :^aty, 
and  the  existing   reasons  for  its   tennina- 


sumed,  wh(>n  Mr.  Sumnkr  made  the  follow- 
ing statement: 

The  Reci])rocity  Treaty  has  a  beautiful 
name.  It  suggests  at  once  exchange,  equal- 
ity, equity;  and  it  is  because  it  was  sup- 
posed to  advance  these  ideas  practically 
that  this  treaty  was  originally  accepted  by 
the  people  of  the  United  States.  If,  how- 
ever, it  shall  appear  that  while  organizing 


tion.     But  after  the  debate  of  a  hw  days  j  an  exchange  it  i'orgets  equality  and  equity 
ago,  and  considering    the  apparent  unani-  j  in  any  essential  respect,  then  must  a  modi- 

ficati<»n  be  made  in  conformity  vi'ith  just 
principles. 

I  mean  to  be  brief,  but  I  hope,  though 
brief,  to  make  tli(!  jjroper  conclusion  ap- 
parent. It  is  a  (piestion  for  reason  and  not 
for  jtassion  or  seutimout,  nud  in  this  spirit 
I  enter  upon  the  discussion. 


inity  in  the  Senate,  I  have  felt  unwilling 
to  occupy  the  time  by  any  protracted  re- 
marks.    They  iirt;  not  needed. 

The  people  of  the  United  States  have 
been  uneasy  under  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  f<n' 
several  years;  I  may  almost  say  from  its 
date.     There   was  a  feeling   that   it  was 


BECIPEOOITY  TREATY. 


The  treaty  may  be  seen  under  four  differ- 
ent heads,  aa  it  concerns,  first,  the  fisheries ; 
secondly,  the  navigation  of  the  St.  Law- 
rence; thirdly,  the  coiHinerce  between  the 
United  >States  and  the  British  provinces, 
and  fourthly,  the  revenue  of  the  United 
States. 

1.  The  fishei-ies  have  bten  a  source  of 
ivnxiety  throughout  our  history,  even  from 
the  beginning,  and  for  several  years  pre- 
vious to  the  reciprocity  treaty  they  had 
been  the  occasion  of  mutual  irritation,  verg- 
ing at  times  on  positive  outbreak.  The 
treaty  was  followed  by  entire  tranquility, 

which  has  not  been  for  a  moment  disturbed.  „...„^.  „  ^^^^ 

This  is  a  plain  advantage  which  cannot  be!  but  it  is  difficult  to  say  how  much  of  this 
(I'Miied.     But  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  |  increase  is  due  to  the  treaty,  and  how  much 


foreign  shipping  which  cleared  during  this 
same  period  was  7,391,399  tons,  while  the 
shipping  of  the  United  States  which  entered 
at  our  custom-house  from  the  British  prov- 
inces was  10,056,183  tons  and  the  foreign 
shipping  winch  entered  was  6,453,520  tons. 
1  mention  these  things  by  way  of  contrast. 
In  comparison  with  these  grand  movements 
of  value  the  business  which  we  have  been 
able  to  do  on  the  St.  Lawrence  seems  to  be 
trivial.  It  need  not  be  considered  as  an 
element  in  the  present  discussion. 

3.  The  treaty  may  be  seen  next  in  its 
bearings  on  the  commerce  between  the  two 
countries.     This  has  increased  immenselv: 


examine  official  returns,  I  do  not  find  any 
farther  evidence  showing  the  value  of  the 
treaty  in  this  connection,  whihs  opinions, 


is  due  t(j  the  natural  growtli  of  population, 
and  the  facilities  of  transportation  in  both 
countries.     If  it  could  be  traced  exclusively 


even  among  those  most  interested  in  the  L-  iu  any  large  measure  to  the  treaty,  it 
fisheries,  are  divided.  There  are  partisans  w„iil.l  bo  an  element  not  to  be  disregarded, 
for  It  in  Gloucester,  and  partisans  a-ainst  it  |  But  it  does  not  follow  from  the  occurrence 
ui  Maine.  j  of  this  increase  rz/^cT  the  treaty  that  it  was 

It  the  treaty  related  exclusively  to  the  on   account   of  the  treaty.     Post  hoc  ergo 


fisheries,  I  should  not  be  wiliing  to  touch 
it :  although  the  circumstance  that  represen- 
tatives of  these  interests  differ  with  regard 
to  its  value  may  leave  it  open  to  debate. 
But  the  practical  question  remains,  whether 
auy  seeming  advaiitage  in  this  respect  is 
sufficient  to  counterbalance  the  disadvantage 
in  other  respects. 

2.  Xext  comes  the  navigation  of  the  St. 
Lawrence.     But  this  plausible  concession 


propter  hoc  is  too  loose  a  rule  for  our  Gov- 
ernmi'iit  on  the  present  occasion . 

The  census  of  the  United  States  and  of 
British  provinces  will  show  au  increase  of 
population  which  nmst  not  be  disregarded 
in  determining  the  origin  of  this  increase  of 
commerce. 

Tlieve  are  also  the  railroads  furnishing 
prompt  a)id  constant  means  of  interconnuu- 
nication  which  have  come  into  successful 


has  proved  to  be  little  m<n-(|  than  a  name.  I  operation  only  since  the  treaty.     It  would 


It  appears  thai  daring  the  first  3ix  years  of 
the  treaty  only  forty  American  vessels,  con- 
taiuing  12,550  tons,  j)assed  seaward  through 
tlie  St.  Lawrence,and  during  the  same  time 
only  nineteen  vessels,  containing  5,  ll(j  tons, 
r(!tnrned  by  the  same  open  highway !  Thest; 
are  very  pretty  amounts  when  we  consider 
the  value  of  the  commerce  on  the  lakes, 
which,  in  1856,  was  $587,1 97, -'^20,  or  wlien 
we  consider  the  carrying  trade  between  the 
United  States  and  the  British  iirovinces. 
Take  the  yeai-s  1857-62,  and  we  shall  find 
that  during  this  period  the  shipping  of  the 
TTnitcd  States  which  cleared  for  the  British 
provinces  was  10,707,329  tons,    and  the 


be  tlifficult  to  exaggerate  tlu^  iniluence  they 
have  exercised  in  (piickening  and  extending 
commerce.  I  cannot  doubt  that  the  rail- 
road system  of  the  two  countries  has  been 
iu  itself  a  Beciprocity  Treaty,  more  compre- 
hensive and  ecpial  than  any  written  on 
parchment. 

Tlie  extent  of  trade  before  and  after  the 
treaty  may  be  seen  in  a  few  figures. 

In  the  three  years  immediately  preceding 
the  treaty  the  total  exjwrts  to  Canada  and 
the  other  British  provinces  were  $48,216,- 
518,  and  the  total  imports  were  $22,588,- 
.'577 ;  being  of  exports  to  inqjorts  in  the 
proportion  of  one  hundred  to  forty-six. 


IHSMP 


EEOIPROOITY  TREATY. 


In  the  ten  years  of  the  treaty  the  total 
exports  to  Canada  and  the  other  British 
provinces  were  $256,350,931.  The  total 
imports  were  $200,399,780.  According  to 
these  ainonats  the  exports  were  in  the  pro- 
portion of  one  hundred  to  seventy-eight. 
If  we  tiilce  Canada  alone  we  shall  find  the 
change  in  this  proportion  greater  still. 
The  total  exports  to  Canada  in  the  three 
years  immediately  preceding  the  treaty 
were  $31,84(),8()5,  and  the  total  imports 
wt^re  !5»  10,589,024  ;  being  in  the  proportion 
of  one  Imndred  to  fifty-two  ;  while  tlie  total 
exports  to  Canada  alone  during  the  ten 
years  of  the  treaty  were  $170,371,911,  and 
the  total  imports  were  SKH, 474,-349,  being 
in  the  proportion  of  one  hundred  to  ninety- 
four. 

I  present  these  tables  simjdy  to  lay  be- 
fore you  the  extent  and  nature  of  the 
change  in  the  commerce  between  tlie  two 
countries.  But  I  forbear  embarking  ^n  the 
umch  debated  Intpiiry  as  t>)  the  efiect  of  a 
difference  l)etween  the  amount  of  e.q^orts 
and  of  hnports,  involving  as  it  does  the 
whole  perilous  (piestion  of  the  balance  of 
trade.  In  the  view  which  I  take  on  thtj 
present  occasion,  it  is  not  necessary  to  con- 
sider it.  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  cannot  be 
maintained  or  overturned  on  any  contested 
principle  of  political  economy. 

4.  I  come,  in  tlie  last  phice,  to  the  influ- 
ence of  the  treaty  on  the  revenue  of  our 
country  ;  and  liere  the  custom-house  is  our 
principal  witness.  The  means  of  determin- 
ing this  question  will  be  found  in  the  au- 
thentic tables  which  have  been  published 
from  time  to  time  in  reports  of  the  Treasury, 
and  especially  in  the  report  made  to  Con- 
gress at  this  session,  which  I  have  in  my 
hand. 

Looking  at  these  tables  we  find  certain 
unanswerable  points.  I  begin  with  an  es- 
timate founded  on  the  trade  before  the  treaty. 
From  this  it  appears  that,  if  no  treaty  had 
been  made,  and  the  trade  had  increased  in 
the  same  ratio  as  before  the  treaty,  Canada 
would  have  paid  to  the  United  States  in  the 
ten  years  of  the  treaty  at  least  $10,373,880, 
from  which  she  has  been  relieved.  This 
sum  is  actually  lost  to  the  revenue  of  the 


United  States.  In  return  Canada  has  given 
up  $2,650,890,  being  the  amount  it  would 
have  collected,  if  no  treaty  had  been  niad«. 
Hero  is  a  vast  disproportion  to  the  detri- 
ment of  the  revenue  of  the  United  States. 

Here  is  another  illustratiou,  derived  from 
the  tables.  During  the  ten  years  of  the 
treaty  the  United  States  have  actually  paid 
in  duties  to  Canada  alone  $10,802,962, 
while  during  this  same  period  Canada  has 
paid  in  duties  to  the  United  States  the  very 
moderate  sum  of  $930,447.  Here  again  is 
a  vast  disproportion,  to  the  detriment  of  the 
revenue  of  the  United  States. 

The  same  inequality  may  be  seen  in 
another  way.  During  the  ten  years  of  the 
treaty  dutiable  products  of  the  United  States 
have  entered  Canada  and  the  other  jj-rovinces 
to  the  amount  of  $84,347,019,  while  during 
this  same  period  duiiahlc  products  of  Canada 
and  the  other  provinces  have  entered  the 
United  States  only  to  the  amount  of  $7,750,- 
482.  During  this  same  period  free produdu 
of  the  United  States  have  entered  Canada 
and  the  other  provinces  to  the  amount  of 
$118,853,972,  wh'ih  free  jiroducts  of  Canada 
and  the  other  provinces  have  entered  the 
United  States  to  the  amount  of  $178,500,184. 
Here,  again,  is  a  vast  disproportion,  to  the 
detriment  of  the  revenue  of  the  United 
Stales. 

Add  to  these  various  results  the  statement 
in  the  report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treas- 
ury, which  has  been  just  laid  on  our  tables, 
in  the  following  words  : 

"The  treiity  has  released  from  duty  a  total 
sum  of  $4*^,:j;J3,257  in  value  of  jioods  of  Canada 
more  than  of  goods  the  produce  of  the  United 
States." — Foreign  and  Domestic  Commerce, 
1364,  page  93. 

This  conclusion  is  in  substantial  harmony 
witli  that  which  I  had  reached  from  an  in- 
dependent examinatiim  of  the  tables. 

From  these  various  illustrations  it  is  clear 
that  the  revenue  of  the  United  States  has 
suffered  by  the  treaty  in  question,  and  that 
in  this  important  particular  its  advantages 
have  not  been  shared  equally  by  the  two 
countries.  Here,  at  least,  it  loses  all  title 
to  its  name. 

But  the  onerous  character  of  this  treaty 


RECIPROCITY  TREATY. 


has  become  manifest  in  other  forms  since 
the  adoption  of  our  system  of  internal  rev- 
enue. I  need  not  remind  the  Senate  of  the 
extent  to  which  M'e  have  gone  in  seeliing 
out  objects  of  excise,  and  now  there  are  va- 
rious propositions  still  pending  in  the  same 
direction,  seeking  new  objects ;  but  it  is  no- 
torious that  such  taxation  is  always  gradu- 
ated with  reference  to  the  tariff  on  the  same 
objects  when  imported  from  abroad.  But 
here  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  steps  forward 
w^ith  its  imperative  veto.  Thus,  for  in- 
stance, the  lumber  of  our  country  is  left  free 
from  excise,  though  I  am  assured  that  it 
might  well  bear  it,  simply  because  no  coun- 
tervailing tax  can  be  imposed  upon  lumber 
from  the  British  provinces.  Had  a  tax  of 
five  per  cent,  been  imposed  upon  the  lum- 
ber of  our  country,  I  am  assured,  from  those 
familiar  with  the  subject,  that  we  should 
have  received  at  least  $5,000,000 ;  all  of 
which  is  lost  to  our  annual  revenue.  But 
this  is  only  a  single  illustration. 

There  are  other  ways  in  which  the  treaty 
and  our  excise  system  come  into  conflict. 
Practical  difficulties,  I  am  assured,  have 
already  occurred  in  the  Bureau  of  Internal 
Revenue.  But  this  conflict  will  be  seen  in 
the  extent  to  which  the  business  of  the 
country,  and  even  its  agriculture,  is  taxed 
now.  Everything  is  taxed.  Even  the  far- 
mer works  now  with  taxed  tools.  These 
considerations,  with  the  increased  value  of 
labor  among  us,  must  give  new  advantageij 
to  the  productive  interests  of  Canada  as 
compared  with  ours,  and  tend  still  further 
to  the  unequal  operation  of  the  treaty. 
Even  admitting  its  original  equality,  you 
cannot  deny  that  the  currents  of  war,  in 
these  latter  days,  may  have  worked  changes 
requiring  new  arrangements  and  adapta- 
tions. 

Mr.  President,  such  is  the  result  of  a  can- 
did inquiry  into  the  operation  of  this  treaty, 
as  it  concerns  the  fisheries,  the  navigation 
of  the  St.  Lawrence,  the  commerce  of  the 
two  countries,  and  the  revenue  of  the 
United  States.  I  have  kept  nothing  back 
favorable  to  the  treaty  that  could  be  ade- 
quately stated  iu  the  brief  space  which  I 


have  allowed  myself,  nor  have  I  exagge- 
rated its  unequal  operation. 

And  now  the  question  is,  shall  this  con- 
dition of  things  be  reconsidered  ?  The 
treaty  itself,  as  if  anticipating  this  exigency, 
furnishes  the  opportunity  by  expressly  pro- 
vidhig  for  its  termination  at  the  expiration  of 
ten  years,  on  notice  of  one  year  from  either 
party.  Great  Britain  is  free  to  give  this 
notice ;  so  are  the  United  States.  Consider- 
ing the  i>resent  state  of  the  country,  it  would 
seem  to  be  improvident  not  to  give  the  notice. 
We  must  husband  our  resources  ;  nor  can  a 
foreign  Government  justly  expect  us  to  con- 
tinue a  treaty  which  is  a  drain  upon  our 
revenue.  In  every  direction  wo  are  now 
turning  for  subjects  of  taxation.  Car  own 
people  are  contributing  in  every  way 
largely.  Commerce,  manufactures  in  every 
form,  are  obliged  to  come  to  the  assistance 
of  the  country.  I  know  no  reason  why  the 
large  amounts  enfranchised  by  this  treaty 
should  enjoy  the  imnmnity  which  has  been 
thus  far  conceded  to  them.  An  inequality 
which,  in  ordinary  times,  would  have  es- 
caped observation,  becomes  too  apparent 
in  the  blaze  of  preseut  responsibilities. 

Something  has  been  said  about  accom- 
panyiiig  the  proposed  notice  with  in,struc- 
tions  to  negotiate  a  new  treaty.  This  is 
entirely  unnecessary.  A  new  treaty  may 
not  be  advisable.  It  is  possible  that  the 
whole  matter  may  be  settled  T)y  Congress 
under  general  laws.  In  all  events,  there  is 
a  full  year  from  the  19th  of  March  next  in 
which  to  provide  a  substitute,  either  by  ne- 
gotiation or  by  legislation.  And  this  re- 
mark is  applicable  to  the  fisheries,  as  well 
as  to  -^very  other  interest  touched  by  the 
treaty.  I  cannot  doubt  that  the  two  con- 
tracting parties  wall  approach  the  whole 
question  in  the  determination  to  settle  it  on 
the  permanent  foundations  of  justice  and 
equity;  but  the  first  step  in  this  direction  is 
the  notice  to  terminate  the  existing  treaty. 

A  debate  ensued  which  lasted  two  days  in 
the  course  of  which  Mr.  Sumner,  in  reply, 
spoke  as  follows : 

The  proposition  to  terminate  the  Reci- 
procity Treaty  has  been  mystified  in  various 


8 


RECIPROCITV  TREATY. 


ways.     There  has  been  a  myHfification  be- 1  the  treaty  causes  in  our  internal  tax-ition 

iZtn'R^T  '""^  -/Ir  .  ?:^"'">^^^  ^f  P''-'-*^  ^«  ^  ^-l-'*^  of  duties  and  o  S: 
lh[!K.  f  i'  v.'^^^l-^  Conunittee,  to  It  is  not  enough  to  say  that  there  is  a  coun- 
,^hch  are  referred  all  treaties  and  questions  tervailing  advlintaqe  in  the  increase  of  or 
With  foreign  powers,  ^yas  not  the  pror-er  commerce.  The  conclusion  is  none  the  iZ 
committee  t..  consider  it,  accr.rding  to  the  !  ^xact,  that  our  national  revenue  is  in  paired 
usages  and  traditions  of  the  Senate.  Pray | And  the  question  is  distinctly  pre  erte 
what  other  committee  could  eo    ustlv  deal  -'^ -*'-"■-  --'•       ••    '  ^    Fit^»emeu, 

with  it?  ^ 

There  has  also  heen  a  mystification  in  ar 


whether,  at  this  critical  moment,  in  a  period 
of  war,  wlicn  the  whole  country  in  its 
wealth  and  labor  is  contributing  to  the  sup 


gumeut,  by  an  accumulation  of  statistics  and  port  of  our  Government,  any  good  reason  can 
igures  without  end.  _  We  have  been  treated  be  assigned  why  the  c  mimfrce  of  Cana 
to  calculatmns,  sliowmg  the  increase  of  eom-  should  1.e  exempt  from  contribu?!..!!  a  so 

IS:rT..:orexnort"tr-'  ''^^.  ''%"'^^^^"  ^''"'"'^^^■^'^  ''^^«^'^--'  -anuSfrers,  tti: 
increase  ot  exports  and  imports.     I  am  no 


ness,  income,  tea,   coffee,  books,  all  pay 
(tribute.     The  tax-gatherer  is  everywhere 

A I  home 


stranger  to   tliese   calculations,    but   after 

careful  study,  I  am  satisfied  that  it  is  im- 1  except  on  the  Canadian  frontier,     iu  home 
possible  to  hi.d  ni  thein  any  terra  finna  ou   there  is  not  an  interest,  hardly  a  se  timent 
^rS/"i  "T\:''  *^"?  <15«""««ion.     They  |  which  is  free  from  tax;tion.  ^Sure  y    here 

?i^e  mi^n^;   '       ■'"' '^^^^^^^^  "^  '^^  r^«™*  conduct  of^Caria! 

"^'  d'ans  to  induce  us  to  treat  them  better  than 


In  tlie  remarlcs  which  I  submitted  to  the 
Senate  yesterday,  I  declined  to  dwell  on  these 
calculations,  for  I  saw  that,  while  involving 
large  amounts,  they  were  uncertain,  inctm- 
clusiveand  inapplicable.  With  one  theory 
of  political  economy  they  seemed  to  point  one 
way,  and  with  another  thoory  they  seemed 
to  point  another  way.  If,  for  instance,  you 
accept  the  early  theory  that  commerce  is  dis- 
advantageous where  the  imports  exceed  tlie 
exports,  they  seem  to  tell  against  tlie  treaty ; 
but,  if  y(ju  accept  tlie  opposite  theory  of 

later  — ■' "'  .      .  „     , 

way 


we  treat  ourselves. 

But  tliere  is  another  consideration  which 
is  decisive,  even  if  others  should  fail.  In 
view  of  existing  Public  Opinion,  and  consid- 
ering the  criticisms  of  the  Treaty,  it  is  im- 
portant that  onrrelations  with  Canada^hould 
be  carefully  revised  in  the  light  of  experience. 
The  Treaty,  in  autliorizing  its  termination 
at  the  end  of  ten  years,  seems  to  have  an- 
ticipated tliis  very  exigency.  But  this  re- 
vision cannot  be  made  advantageously  with- 
out proposed  notice.     In  the  case  of  a  lease 


writers,  they  seem  to  tell  the  other  ^'»\Pr"F>^<'d  notice.     In  the  case  of  a  lease 
All  this  assumes  that  they  are  an-  i  '^'"^  ^  ^'S'^*  ^^*  terminate  it  at  the  end  of  ten 
plicable.     lint  nobody  has  yet  be/n  able  to  I  ^f  ^'"^  ^"^  ^  ^^^'^^'^  ""*^<'*''  ^^^  landlord,  if  the 
slxow  that  the  general  increase  of  commerce  i  ^  "™.^'*'^''  ^^  the  lease  had  been  called 
since  the  treaty  Jias  been  cn,nfi«.l  Iw  +].»  question,  would  not  hesitate    to  give  : 


years  on  a  yei 

the  lease  had  been  called  in 
question,  would  not  hesitate  to  give  the 
notice,  if  for  no  other  reason,  that  he  might 
revise  the  terms  anew  on  a  footing  of  equal- 
ity. For  like  reason  M-e  must  give  the  no- 
tice to  Great  Britain.  We  must  untie  our- 
selves now,  even  if  we  would  tie  ourselves 
again  for  the  future.  T:ie  notice  will  leave 
us  "  master  of  the  ;,ituation  "  to  this  extent 
at  least,  tliat^we  sliall  be  free  to  act,  accord- 
ing to  the  requirements  of  the  public  good. 
Without  this  iKitice  there  wll  be  no  foothold 
foi  negotiation  or  legislation  ;  but  the  notice 
will  be  a  foothold  from  which  we  may  ac- 
^  complish  whatev(-r  is  proper  and  just.  The 
frontier;  M'hicli,  under  throueratlon  of  the '  ^^^^^  "^''^^  ?'^  reconsidered  and  then  adopt- 
treaty,  yields  little  or  nothing,  wlien  it  mi«ht !  '''^  '^^f  ^/i'''  '^  "'■'^'  ^"^  entirely  changed,  and 
yield  much;  and,  secondly,  it  is  impaired  i  "T  '1  o)T  '^  J:«^^' ^^"^  this  duty-so  that 
through  th.'  check  and  embarassment  which  ^''''''"  *'"^  ^^'^  ''""i'"''-'  ^^^^  ^^^'  '"^y  ^<^g'»- 


since  the  treaty  Jias  been  caused  by  the 
treaty.  Th-r;-  nnj  other  agencies  which 
have  had  their  iiitlueuce;  aiul  it  is  dillicult 
to  say  what  is  due  to  them  nud  what  is  due 
to  the  treaty. 

In  this  uncertiin+y,  I  have  pr(>ferred  to 
rest  the  proposition  on  the  simple  ground 
that  the  national  revenue  is  impaired  by 
this  treaty.  Authentic  tigures  place  this 
beyond  question. 

I  forbear  now  from  all  details  and  content 
inyself  with  stating  the  indubitable  conclu- 
sion. The  national  revenue  is  impaired  iu 
two  ways,  first,  at  the  custom-house  on  our 


J.  W.  PRATT  &  CO.,  Priutors,  75  Fulton  Street,  ^Tcw  York. 


